The Garda says there has been a public outcry over advertisements for massage parlours. What outcry? Who heard anything at all after the decision of the Censorship of Publications Board to ban In Dublin; other, that is, than a guffawed howl of derision?

Admittedly, anything that makes you laugh can't be entirely bad; but otherwise, it was simply another public display of sanctimony of worthy Irish vintage - going back to the riots over the use of the word "shift" on stage in a city packed to the gunwales with whores - and using an already ridiculous censorship law to extend the power of the board of censors.

Was that the intention of the censorship laws; not merely to keep our hands off indecent material, but to regulate our behaviour throughout our lives? So that because it is unquestionably the case that people will be legally depraved and corrupted if they embark upon a career of burglary, therefore Raffles should be banned?

We knew the censors were installed to prevent the virtuous eyes of the Irish people from reading material that might sexually arouse them, with heaven knows what consequences. Was it also part of some totalitarian code by which the State could invigilate over everything its citizens read, to ensure that no matter subversive of the law reached the public? If that were the case, would not motoring magazines which revel in fast cars be a proper subject for our censors to suppress?

Fast cars merely kill, a tidy dozen over the past few days. Sex qua sex doesn't; but we behave as if it does. Contrary to our self-image of being a modern, enlightened people, we still have extraordinary difficulty in dealing with sex. Long after the rest of Europe had ended the criminalisation of male homosexual conduct, we clung to our barbarous, outdated laws; and we were unable to lift them without, in the very same liberalising measure, criminalising kerb-crawling by men looking for prostitutes, instead of making life easier for those fair ladies.

I don't know what makes some women become prostitutes, but some always have done. And I don't know what makes some men go to prostitutes, but some always have done. Wouldn't it make a great deal of sense to recognise this unchanging feature of human nature? What is gained by criminalising it? Are not all parties consenting adults?

Why should people not be allowed to advertise their services, sexual or otherwise, to be performed in the privacy of their own workplace? Why criminalise what is consenting behaviour between adults? Yes, yes, yes: I can hear people say that these women are exploited by men for their sexual services. Maybe they are; maybe they're not. Maybe they exploit men's sexual weakness. Maybe everyone involved is degraded; but what is more certain is that everyone involved is adult, and that is the primary point.

Prostitutes are not compelled into their profession, though they might well be slaves to drugs. If that's so, why doubly victimise women who are already in deep trouble? Moreover, the power exercised over their lives by pimps in their criminalised underworld would be infinitely reduced if they were able to work openly.

In Dublin wouldn't have so many advertisements for knocking shops unless there were a demand for them, in both directions. Many women have realised that there's money to be made by offering these services and many men feel the need for them. Is it not better that this kind of business is done in a regulated, healthy way in lawful establishments, rather than have it driven underground and controlled by violent criminals?

Might not certain run-down neighbourhoods such as Sorrento Terrace in Dalkey, or Ailesbury Road in Dublin, be designated red-light districts, where the sex business could operate lawfully? Not merely would a legalised sex industry restore vitality to such derelict areas, but it would bring new and much-needed employment opportunities for the largely unskilled and under-educated locals.

Instead of this eminently sensible course of action, we are to have a Garda inquiry into the sex industry after the discovery by the Censorship Board - one which rocked the nation - that the Saucy Soozie We-Do-It-Swedish-Style Bonking Emporium was not primarily engaged in providing orthopaedic massage for elderly Presbyterian spinsters.

Policemen everywhere are used to the sneering inquiry: "Have you nothing better to do with your time?" The Garda should get used to that question now, as its best and brightest sleuths follow clues which suggest that Sharon Who Talks Dirty And Does It In The Nude might not be, strictly speaking, a fully qualified physiotherapist. Let me interrupt here to say: she's not. How deplorable. Tut, tut, tut. There now. I've just conducted your inquiry for you; which means you can go back to road-deaths and murders.

A few questions for the nannies of the Censorship Board: do you intend to ban Autocar, Top Gear and other magazines which exult in speed? Do you intend to ban publications which carry advertising for alcohol, which certainly can corrupt and deprave, as well as making people very bad drivers? And if you're worried about the effect of publications on behaviour, why did you never turn your attention to the in-house magazine of murder-for-the-cause, An Phoblacht/Republican News? Because there's no sex in it, maybe?

And have you considered seeing a psychiatrist about these strange priorities you have?